Suppr超能文献

5 毫米直径双极和超声剪在杂交猪颈动脉切割中的疗效和安全性。

Efficacy and safety of 5-mm-diameter bipolar and ultrasonic shears for cutting carotid arteries of the hybrid pig.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Otto-von-Guericke-University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2011 Feb;25(2):577-85. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1224-6. Epub 2010 Jul 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Experimental data about the efficacy and safety of sealing devices are rare. Therefore, this study investigated these parameters for three commercially available energy-based vascular sealing and cutting systems.

METHODS

In male hybrid pigs, 487 carotid artery segments were sealed and cut using the harmonic scalpel or several bipolar sealing devices. The sealing failure rate, burst pressure, process time, and extent of lateral thermal damage were analyzed.

RESULTS

A regular sealing and cutting process in more than 90% of the carotid arteries was found using the following instruments: LS1520, ACE (level 1), ACE (level 3), CS14C (level 1), WAVE (level 1), and WAVE (level 5). The largest failure rate was found for the CS14C device (level 5: initial sealing failure, 21.5%). The maximal mean burst pressure (1727±453 mmHg) was reached using the ACE device (level 1). Significant differences were found in the size of the lateral thermal damage, which a ranged from 2.5 mm (LS1520) to 1.51 mm (CS14C, level 1). The process time ranged widely from 6.8 s (ACE, level 5) to 31.83 s (WAVE, level 1).

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrated that all the tested devices are efficacious and safe in sealing and cutting arteries up to 5 mm in diameter. All the devices showed supraphysiologic mean burst pressures. Differences in failure rate, thermal damage, and process time lead to an advised application of the different systems.

摘要

背景

关于密封设备疗效和安全性的实验数据较为匮乏。因此,本研究调查了三种市售的基于能量的血管密封切割系统的这些参数。

方法

在雄性杂交猪中,使用超声刀或几种双极密封设备对 487 段颈总动脉进行了密封和切割。分析了密封失败率、爆破压力、处理时间和侧向热损伤程度。

结果

以下仪器在超过 90%的颈总动脉中实现了常规的密封和切割过程:LS1520、ACE(级别 1)、ACE(级别 3)、CS14C(级别 1)、WAVE(级别 1)和 WAVE(级别 5)。CS14C 设备的失败率最高(级别 5:初始密封失败率为 21.5%)。ACE 设备(级别 1)达到的最大平均爆破压力(1727±453mmHg)最高。侧向热损伤的大小差异显著,范围从 2.5mm(LS1520)到 1.51mm(CS14C,级别 1)。处理时间范围很广,从 6.8s(ACE,级别 5)到 31.83s(WAVE,级别 1)。

结论

本研究表明,所有测试的设备在密封和切割直径达 5mm 的动脉时均有效且安全。所有设备均显示出超生理的平均爆破压力。失败率、热损伤和处理时间的差异导致建议应用不同的系统。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验